Neelam Saini vs Kavita And Others
2024 Latest Caselaw 6239 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Neelam Saini vs Kavita And Others on 19 March, 2024

Author: Anil Kshetarpal

Bench: Anil Kshetarpal

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039438




                                              2024:PHHC:039438
130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH

                                        EFA-2-2024 (O&M)
                                        Date of decision: 19.03.2024
Neelam Saini
                                               ....Appellant

            Versus

Kavita and others
                                              ..Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:-   Mr. Rajeev Dev Sharma, Advocate for the appellant

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)

1. This Execution First Appeal has been filed by the judgment

debtor's brother's wife. She claims exemption from the attachment of

the property on the ground that it was transferred by the judgment debtor

in her favour on 14.12.2009.

2. The existence of an award passed by the Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal against the judgment debtor is not in dispute. In a

motor vehicular accident, Sh.Rajinder Kumar lost his precious life on

27.11.2009. The claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of

the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which was allowed on 16.01.2012. The

claimants are still struggling to receive the amount. The Executing

Court has attached the property. The petitioner claims that she is a

bonafide purchaser. The Executing Court has come to a conclusion that

the transfer by the judgment debtor in favour of the petitioner is not

bonafide.

3. Heard the learned counsel representing the appellant at

length and with his able assistance perused the paperbook.

                               1 of 2

                                    Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:039438




EFA-2-2024 (O&M)                           2            2024:PHHC:039438

4. Learned counsel representing the appellant contends that the

transfer of the property in favour of the appellant is before the filing of

the claim petition and the attached property was not a part of the suit.

5. This Court has considered the submissions made by the

learned counsel representing the appellant.

6. Admittedly, the transfer of the property in favour of the

appellant is after the death of Sh. Rajinder Kumar on account of rash and

negligent driving by the judgment debtor. Sh. Rajinder Kumar died in a

motor vehicular accident, which took place on 27.11.2009. Section 53

of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 provides that every transfer of

immovable property made with intent to defeat or delay the rights of

creditors to recover the amount shall be voidable at the option of any

creditor so defeated or delayed. Though the claimants are not strictly

creditors, however, the aforesaid principle can be invoked in the present

case, particularly when the appellant is judgment debtor's brother's wife.

7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, no ground to interfere

is made out.

8. Hence, dismissed.

9. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

19.03.2024                                      (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha                                                 JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :         Yes/No
Whether reportable :                Yes/No




                                  2 of 2